• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
CSR: A Philosophical Perspective
 

CSR: A Philosophical Perspective

on

  • 2,372 views

In this paper, an attempt has been made to explore the philosophy of ...

In this paper, an attempt has been made to explore the philosophy of
Corporate social responsibility (CSR) from an ancient Indian perspective. A
review of literature in CSR shows that there are thousands of articles which
have been written by several academics on this subject from numerous
perspectives, but limited articles written about CSR from the philosophical,
historical and from the ancient perspectives. As a result, this article not only
fills the gap in the literature, but also provides insights on CSR philosophy
from the ancient Indian perspective. In the Indian context, the origin of CSR
can be traced from the Vedic literatures such as the Valmiki Ramayana, the
Mahabharata (includes the Bhagavad-Gita) and the Puranas. These literatures
were written more than 5,000 years ago in Sanskrit language. However, in this
paper the authors will explore CSR philosophy from Kautilya’s Arthasastra,
which was also written in Sanskrit in the 4th century BC. This paper is based
on hermeneutics, a qualitative research methodology which involves study,
understanding and interpretation of ancient or classical text. By using the above
methodology, the authors reveal some ancient lessons on CSR, which can
provide guidance to corporate leaders today. In a nutshell, the Kautilya’s
Arthasastra provides an inside-out approach to CSR, which is development of
the individual leader’s self conscience, contrary to the western approach that
takes an outside-in perspective. The leaders and the role they play in
corporations are crucial in ensuring transparency, good conduct and governance
towards the ultimate aim of achieving CSR.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
2,372
Views on SlideShare
2,372
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
1
Downloads
116
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    CSR: A Philosophical Perspective CSR: A Philosophical Perspective Document Transcript

    • 408 Int. J. Indian Culture and Business Management, Vol. 1, No. 4, 2008Corporate Social Responsibility: a philosophicalapproach from an ancient Indian perspective Balakrishnan Muniapan* Human Resource Management, School of Business, Curtin University of Technology, CDT 250, 98009 Miri, Sarawak, Malaysia Fax: +60 85 443950 E-mails: mbalakrsna@yahoo.com; bala.m@curtin.edu.my *Corresponding author Mohan Dass Faculty of Business and Enterprise, Swinburne University of Technology, John Street, Hawthorn, Vic. 3122, Australia Fax: +61 3 98192117 E-mail: dmohan@groupwise.swin.edu.au Abstract: In this paper, an attempt has been made to explore the philosophy of Corporate social responsibility (CSR) from an ancient Indian perspective. A review of literature in CSR shows that there are thousands of articles which have been written by several academics on this subject from numerous perspectives, but limited articles written about CSR from the philosophical, historical and from the ancient perspectives. As a result, this article not only fills the gap in the literature, but also provides insights on CSR philosophy from the ancient Indian perspective. In the Indian context, the origin of CSR can be traced from the Vedic literatures such as the Valmiki Ramayana, the Mahabharata (includes the Bhagavad-Gita) and the Puranas. These literatures were written more than 5,000 years ago in Sanskrit language. However, in this paper the authors will explore CSR philosophy from Kautilya’s Arthasastra, which was also written in Sanskrit in the 4th century BC. This paper is based on hermeneutics, a qualitative research methodology which involves study, understanding and interpretation of ancient or classical text. By using the above methodology, the authors reveal some ancient lessons on CSR, which can provide guidance to corporate leaders today. In a nutshell, the Kautilya’s Arthasastra provides an inside-out approach to CSR, which is development of the individual leader’s self conscience, contrary to the western approach that takes an outside-in perspective. The leaders and the role they play in corporations are crucial in ensuring transparency, good conduct and governance towards the ultimate aim of achieving CSR. Keywords: ancient Indian literatures; Corporate Social Responsibility; CSR; Kautilya’s Arthasastra. Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Muniapan, B. and Dass, M. (2008) ‘Corporate Social Responsibility: a philosophical approach from an ancient Indian perspective’, Int. J. Indian Culture and Business Management, Vol. 1, No. 4, pp.408–420.Copyright © 2008 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.
    • Corporate Social Responsibility: a philosophical approach 409 Biographical notes: Balakrishnan Muniapan, MScHRM (UK), BEcons (UKM), CIPM (MIPM), CIWT (AUST), currently teaches Human Resource Management (HRM), Industrial Relations, International Management and Asian Management for undergraduate and MBA programmes at Curtin. He had previously taught for the British University programme in Beijing, PR China and for British and Australian Universities programme in Penang, Malaysia. He is also an Active Industrial Law Consultant for several organisations in Malaysia. As a consultant and trainer, he has conducted training and consultancy programmes for more than 50 organisations in Malaysia, Singapore and China. He is also an invited speaker for various HRM forums and conferences in Malaysia and abroad. He has published several articles, book chapters and journal articles in several international journals. He has also presented HRM-related papers and topics at academic conferences and seminars in Malaysia, Singapore, Brunei, Thailand, the Philippines, China, Japan, India, Sri Lanka, Pakistan and Australia. Mohan Dass, PhD (Melbourne), MBA (EAU, Macau), BA(Hons) USM, Malaysia, is currently the Programme Director, Master of Management and a Lecturer in Human Resources Management and Organisational Studies in undergraduate and post-graduate levels at the Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne. His PhD thesis (under scholarship from Deakin University, Melbourne) is entitled, ‘The New Public Management in Malaysian Public Enterprises’. He has also written several conference articles, journals, research papers and is actively involved in major research projects both for the public sector and private organisations in Malaysia and Australia. He is also an external moderator for several International Colleges with relationship to Australian Universities. He was formerly the Vice-President (Academic) for a Malaysian College delivering a full Australian degree programme in Malaysia while also lecturing Management and Marketing units in Malaysia. Prior to joining the educational sector, he was an Active Management Staff Member at the Penang Economic Development Corporation for several years which involved industrial, commercial and residential development of the State. He received a full scholarship to study his BA (USM), where he undertook a study on small and medium scale industries in Western Europe. He also won another scholarship to complete his MBA (Macau) with a thesis entitled, ‘Management of the Malaysian Free Industrial Zones’.1 IntroductionManagement theories and concepts from the west have dominated the world for over twocenturies. This dominance is due to the colonisation and the widespread use of English inmany countries and the readily availability of management literatures in Englishlanguage. However, a careful analysis reveals that many of the recently popularisedwestern management theories and concepts have been in practice in Asian countriesespecially in India and also in China for centuries. However, these practices were notonly in the context business organisation, but also in the context of state or politicalgovernance. Sharma (2001) argues that for a management system, to be effective, it hasto be rooted in the cultural soil of the country, where it is practiced. Many communitiesand countries in the world are now trying to discover and explore their own system ofmanagement, which includes accounting and financial management, human resourcemanagement, corporate governance, and also CSR. The interest in exploring Asian
    • 410 B. Muniapan and M. Dassphilosophies in management is also growing as over the past two decades as severalresearch studies and books had been published to explore an ancient Chinese Art of Warcalled ‘Sun Tzu Bing Fa’ and Confucianism in the context of management. In the ancient India during the period of Chandragupta Maurya in the 4th century BC,several management ideas and practices (includes CSR) were found, which was based onthe Kautilya’s Arthasastra. Similar to Sun Tzu Art of War in China, 2,500 years ago,Kautilya’s Arthasastra is an Indian treatise in management and was written by Kautilya(also known as Chanakya and Vishnugupta). Kautilya was the minister and adviser toChandragupta Maurya, who was the contemporary of Alexander the Great (4th CenturyBC). He was previously the Professor of Politics and Economics at Taxila University,which at present is situated in Rawalpindi, Pakistan. The Arthashastra (Principles ofEconomics and Administration) and Neetishastra (also known as Chanakya Neeti orPrinciples of Political Ethics) were two of the important works of Kautilya. Kautilya’sArthashastra was written in Sanskrit and contains 150 chapters, which are classified bytopic in 15 books, which covers three parts, namely, national security issues,administration of justice and economics development policies. Kautilya’s Arthashastrashares many common philosophical and practical views with Machiavelli’s The Prince(15th century AD). Kautilya has been generally criticised by many people as a verycunning person and he is compared to Machiavelli, the author of The Prince, whichcontains methods that could seem unrighteous in the achievement of goals. However, thiscomparison may not be justified, as Kautilya gives a lot of stress on self-control andproper methods of winning over the enemy. Radhakrishnan (2005) elaborated in 12 sutras(verses) of Kautilya with regards to self-control, which includes the importance of controlover the senses by giving up kama, krodha, lobha, mana, mada and harsha, i.e. lust,anger, pride, arrogance and foolhardiness. The first teaching of Kautilya is to conquer theinternal enemies before you conquer the external enemies. According to Kautilya, bycasting out the group of six enemies he (the king) should acquire control over the senses,cultivate his intellect by association with elders, keep a watchful eye by means of spies,bring about security and well-being by (energetic) activity, maintain the observance oftheir special duties (by the subjects) by carrying out (his own) duties, acquire disciplineby (receiving) instruction in the sciences, attain popularity by association with what is ofmaterial advantage and maintain (proper) behaviour by (doing) what is beneficial(Muniapan and Shaikh, 2007).2 The broad purpose of this paperFrom the perspectives of the authors, the research and writings of management ideasfrom the Asian context although is growing but still limited. Most of the researches aregeneral in nature and not in-depth studies. Even this paper is also not an in-depth analysisKautilya’s Arthashastra as it only attempts to explore the CSR lessons from the literature.In general, the study of Kautilya’s Arthashastra in the context of modern managementpractices especially CSR is indeed limited. As previously stated, Indians (Asian)management in particular, are still focusing in applying western models of managementpractices due to the wealth of western management literatures and concepts available.Besides, many of the new generation of Indian (Asian) managers have received theireducation in management from western countries (especially in the UK and the USA)(Muniapan, 2005a). There are also some fears among the Asian academics that the
    • Corporate Social Responsibility: a philosophical approach 411management philosophy, concepts and ideas from Asia will not be able to get acceptancefrom the West. According to Arindam Chaudhuri, one of the preacher of Theory ‘I’ Management orIndian management, although India has some of the best management schools in theworld, most Indian organisations have not been able to do well internationally. Amongthe reasons cited is the failure of Indian management to develop the indigenousmanagement style, which revolves around Indian cultural roots and upbringing. He(Arindam Chaudhuri) further asserted that an Indian grows up in a system, where familyties and sense of belongingness gets top priority and with this type of background, he orshe may not be able to adjust or fit into the job environment practicing Americanphilosophies of individualistic, direct, low power distance and contractual style ofmanagement (Chaudhuri, 2003). Several lessons in management and CSR can be explored from Kautilya’sArthashastra, however, there are many corporate leaders from outside India and Indianswho are not aware of what Kautilya’s Arthashastra can offer to enhance their managerialeffectiveness. This paper aims to explore the CSR lessons from Kautilya’s Arthashastraand also to create awareness to readers of management on the existence of many ancientliteratures from India like the Arthashastra, which provides many valuable lessons inefficient and effective corporate management.3 MethodologyThis paper is based on a qualitative research methodology called hermeneutics.Hermeneutics is related to the name of the Greek god Hermes in his role as the interpreterof the messages of the gods. In the current context, hermeneutics can be described as theinterpretation and understanding of ancient literatures and religious texts. It is also usedin contemporary philosophy to denote the study of theories and methods of theinterpretation of all texts and systems of meaning. The concept of ‘text’ is here extendedbeyond written documents to any number of objects subject to interpretation, likeexperiences. A hermeneutic is defined as a specific system or method for interpretation,or a specific theory of interpretation. The scope of hermeneutics also includes theinvestigation and interpretation not only of ancient texts, but also of human behaviourgenerally, including language and patterns of speech, social institutions and ritualbehaviours. Hermeneutics is widely applied in many field of social science such asphilosophy, religion and theology, law, sociology and also international relations(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermeneutics). Kautilya wrote his Arthashastra in Sanskrit language. Sanskrit is one of the oldestlanguages in the world and it has also influenced many other languages in Europe andalso in Asia. The Arthashastra was written for the purpose of managing a kingdom or acountry. For example, in explaining the Arthashastra in the context of management, theterm rajya (state) is interpreted to the organisation, the raja or king is the leader or theChief Executive Officer (CEO), amatya or mantri (ministers) are the managers of variousdepartments such as finance, marketing, human resources and operations, kosh refers tofinances, danda the administrative or the management system, durg, the security systemand bal the work force (Muniapan and Shaikh, 2007).
    • 412 B. Muniapan and M. Dass4 CSR: an overviewCSR refers to the obligation of an organisation which considers the interests of all theirstakeholders which includes the customers, employees, shareholders, communities andecological considerations in all aspects of their operations. This obligation is seen toextend beyond their statutory obligation to comply with legislation. CSR goes beyond thenormal charity activities of an organisation and this requires that the responsibleorganisation take into full account of its impact on all stakeholders and on theenvironment when making decisions. In a nutshell, CSR requires the organisations tobalance the needs of all stakeholders with its need to make a profit and rewardshareholders adequately. A widely quoted definition by the World Business Council for SustainableDevelopment states that “Corporate social responsibility is the continuing commitment by business to behave ethically and contribute to economic development while improving the quality of life of the workforce and their families as well as of the local community and society at large.” (http://www.wbcsd.org/DocRoot/RGk80O49q8ErwmWXIwtF/CSR meeting.pdf)Practices of CSR dates back to the ancient Greece (Eberstadt, 1977). A similardevelopment on CSR took place on the Indian subcontinent structured from the Vedicphilosophy (Pandey and Tripathi, 2002). Early conceptualisation of CSR was broadlybased on religious virtues and values such as honesty, love, truthfulness and trust. Suchvalues were found dominant in the golden rule constructed by Immanuel Kant’sCategorical Imperative (Evan and Freeman, 1998). It has also been argued that thisgolden rule can be applied in viewing companies as responsible to stakeholders andsociety (Donaldson and Preston, 1995; Evans and Freeman, 1998). Implicitly, thisargument suggests that those who do not practice such values are deemed to be unethicaland not concerned of societal welfare. Since then, civilisations has been in the process ofwealth accumulation through a series of business venture travels to colonise; thenindustrial revolution to capitalise production processes; and finally multinationalcorporations to maximise profits from the modern theories of comparative advantage.Practices of CSR were neglected and overshadowed by the pursuit of wealthaccumulation. A revival of interest in CSR began after the World Wars. Contemporary westernconceptualisation of CSR from an academic perspective was initiated with Bowen’sdefinitive text through his publication in 1953. His work on CSR broadly focused on thepursuit of policies that makes decisions or to follow those lines of action that aredesirable in terms of the objectives and values of our society (Bowen, 1953). Since hispublications, CSR has become a strongly debatable proposition among Westernresearchers. One of the unwavering conceptual arguments is the question of relationshipbetween religion and business ethics (Calkins, 2000; Epstein, 2002; Weaver and Agle,2002). Much of the empirical research work has explicitly attempted to investigate theimplications on business ethics (Stackhouse, 1995; Epstein, 2002). One of the researchesfor instance studied the relationship between religious beliefs and ethical values thatinfluence of managers’ attitude and managerial decision-making (Agle and van Buren,1999; Longnecker, McKinney and Moore, 2004). Carroll argued that socialresponsibilities of business encompass the economics, legal, ethical and discretionary
    • Corporate Social Responsibility: a philosophical approach 413expectations that society has of organisations at a given point in time (Carroll, 1979).Carroll’s continuum of business responsibilities was reconstructed into amultidimensional construct by several other researchers principally by Niskala and Tarna(2003). This multi-dimensional model demonstrates the Western philosophy of ‘triplebottom line’ that superimposes the equilibrium of economic, social and environmentalelements while conducting business. The World Business Council for SustainableDevelopment (WBCSD, 2000) argued that companies have an obligation to society andare responsible to numerous stakeholders including owners, employees, customers,suppliers, competitors, government regulators and communities.5 CSR from an ancient Indian perspectiveFrom the ancient Indian perspective, social responsibility (now CSR) obligation isexpected from the ‘King’ to his subjects (Rig-Veda 1–8). Vedic literature emphasises thatthe role of the king or the accumulator of wealth to take care of the welfare of thesubjects (stakeholders) and in return the king will grow as the Sun grows and shines atdawn and after its rise. It is further expressed that whatever is given to the society, itreturns getting multiplied several times (Rig-Veda et al.). The king or the leader andleadership are considered to be the key necessity for the state or organisation. EvenSri Krishna also stressed the importance of the leaders to Arjuna in the Bhagavad-GitaManu and Shukracharya also echoed similar opinions. The Manusmriti states that whenthe world was without a king and people ran about in all directions out of fear, the Lordemitted a king in order to guard this entire realm. In modern day business philosophy,promotional and public relations strategy adds value to customer perception of theorganisation goods and services. Therefore, the firm maximises its ability to create valueto the business. CSR can be a source of competitive advantage for organisations,however, some researchers have also cautioned against using CSR as a promotional toolbecause it can discredit the company if it misleads stakeholders. It was emphasised byDawkins (2004) that CSR must be effectively communicated to stakeholders for theirappreciation and support. The business benefits arising from the CSR practices wouldresult in credibility for the organisation, reduces the risk profile, improves stakeholdersrelationship which eventually increases efficiency of the firm. Evidently, there arenumerous arguments for and against the practice of CSR in modern corporatemanagement. But often these arguments on CSR are limited to the operational aspects ofthe business and ignored the philosophical context. What is the philosophical approachconcerning CSR to conduct business? What can be learnt from the age-old Indian Vedicphilosophy in terms of CSR? CSR practices in the Indian philosophy sits deep-rooted in the concept of dharma orvirtue which is to conform to the truth of things. Dharma is the basis of order whethersocial or moral (Radhakrishnan, 1929). In accordance with Taittiriya Upanishad, the firstand most essential virtue for an individual is to speak the truth (satyam vada) and thesecond instruction is practice virtue (dharma cara). Dharma then fundamentally is toaction the truth – an ultimate guide to right living and the stability of society(Mukhopadhy, 1960). In reference to Sankara’s commentary, Chakraborty deduced thatdharma is even higher than the external authority of the king. This Indian ethics ofdharma (virtue) is expressed as a synthesis of intellectual understanding andself-realisation which can be achieved by adherence to the eternal dharma and prescribed
    • 414 B. Muniapan and M. Dassby the Vedic literature as the practical guidance in daily life (Chakraborty, 2006). It isclear that Indian philosophy permeates into each individual to reflect upon the truth as hespeaks, take right actions through self-realisation of oneself. The ancient Indian philosophy has also propounded that the law of karma (cause andeffect) as the overarching principle of self-determination of one’s moral character. Thisimplied that the present nature of an individual’s life (effect) is determined by theirantecedent actions (cause). Therefore, an individual has the freedom of moral choice inhis daily life. Karma is then a concept of reward or punishment for the choice madethrough self-determination of an individual. This concept cycle of life or transmigrationis deeply grounded in the Indian classical philosophy of universal ethics. Hence, the lawof karma emphasised the virtue (dharma) as a key plank for self-realisation. It has beenargued that all virtues are conducive to spiritual development and is spiritual whenperformed with the realisation of its relation to the inner spirit (Chakraborty, 2006). In theteachings of Bhagavad-Gita, it has been advised that perfect actions lead one to the‘gateway to liberation (moksha)’. Evidently, the Indian philosophy on ethics has setobjectives beyond this world and pitches itself on virtues that are different from thewestern model of CSR.6 CSR in the Vedic literaturesThe Indian philosophical literatures are derived form of the Vedas, namely, Rig-Veda,Yajur-veda, Sama-Veda and Atharva-veda. The Vedas essentially forms the fundamentalbasis of human life on earth through complete understanding of thespiritualism – knowledge of God, the Soul (atma) and the relationship to the physicaluniverse (prakriti). Rig-Veda specifically states that the cosmic order of the entireuniverse is governed by physical relationship of man to moral laws and any transgressionwill be detrimental (cause and effect to cosmic order). Reflecting on this Vedicknowledge, Swami Dayananda classified it into four orders (Rig-Veda 10-09-9). Thefirst-order is the transcendental knowledge (Jnana), which is the knowledge of theabsolute truth or God. By obedience of his instructions and knowledge of matter(physical qualities and uses of material objects), deviation of the material structure can beavoided. The second-order is action (karma) by which right actions will lead toself-determination and self–realisation of both inner self and social order. The third-orderworship (upasana), relates to all right measures for the realisation of self and God. In thefourth-order, science (vigyan), this is a body of knowledge encompassing Upanishads,Brahman Granthas, Smrities, Puranas and Darshan Shastras. It is clear upon reflectionthat the ancient Indian philosophy propounds that cosmic order requires absolute balance.Vedic knowledge also explicitly informs that right moral practices will enable andstabilise cosmic order. Cosmic order is realised through an understanding oftranscendental knowledge, taking right actions and right measures framed by the sciencesof Vedic philosophy. If mankind disengaged from the knowledge of matter to accumulatematerial wealth without seeking right actions (ethics and social responsibility) physicaldetriments will certainly occur (the law of karma). In the quest for business excellence,the fundamental pursuit of a balanced life has often been ignored in the contemporarybusiness world. Vedic philosophy further identifies four objectives in human life. These are values orvirtue (dharma), money (artha), urges (kama) and salvation (moksha). There is a
    • Corporate Social Responsibility: a philosophical approach 415systematic relationship of each of these objectives. The ultimate element of life should beinterpreted as a drive to achieve moksha or salvation guided by value systems and theurge or motivation to achieve using money (artha) as a form of tool. Sri Krishna inBhagavad-Gita states that ‘value system protects you if you follow it (dharmo rakshatirakshitaha)’. Swami Vivekananda in his reflection of Bhagavad-Gita affirmed that thebasis of social and political system rests on the goodness of man (Vivekananda, 2000).Therefore, value system is superior which drives the right objectives. Wealthaccumulation is to serve the objectives. The principle role of money is to serve the needsof the society (Mahavir, 2001). While the Vedas supports the concept of accumulation ofwealth (Yajur-Veda 10–20; 5–19; 34–38), it also stated clearly the right path to earn greatwealth and riches (Yajur-Veda 7–13). While accumulation of wealth is encouraged, theVedic philosophy proposed the right action on the use of wealth – on self, commotionand donation for the welfare of others. It is also explicitly stated that whatever is given tothe others selflessly, it returns in many folds (Rig-Veda 1–8). Business is viewed as legitimate and an integral part of society according to Vedicphilosophy but essentially it should create wealth for the society through the right meansof action. ‘sarva loka hitam’ in the Vedic literature referred to ‘well-being ofstakeholders’. This means an ethical and social responsibility system must befundamental and functional in business undertakings. Put in simple business sense, theorganisation would sustain long-term advantages and obtain profits if it conducts itsbusinesses ethically and be socially responsible. Vedic literature on business profoundlystates by the following quote: May we together shield each other and may we not be envious towards each other. Wealth is essentially a tool and its continuous flow must serve the welfare of the society to achieve the common good of the society (Atharva-Veda 3-24-5).The Vedic philosophy insists that quality of work and service needs to be achieved in thebusiness process model for long-term sustainability, besides an equitable redistribution ofwealth after having acquiring it. This core principle of Corporate Social Responsibility(CSR) expounded by the Vedic literature is being reengineered in the modern businessmodels, namely, Total Quality Management (TQM), Business Process Reengineering andtriple bottom-line sustainability. In the Bhagavad-Gita, the key principles of Vedic philosophy is re-cemented in theIndian mind on the basic moral understandings required to achieve salvation throughtranscendental knowledge, the obedience to law of karma, self-realisation, and theperformance of actions under the framework of Vedic sciences. The Bhagavad-Gita isaccepted as a universal body of knowledge and remains as a lifelong scientific andspiritual model for mankind. It triggers the search for self-realisation and appropriateright action in the material driven world. Sri Krishna says in the Bhagavad-Gita (3–13),that all sorrows from the society would be removed if socially conscious members of acommunity feel satisfaction in enjoying the remnants of their work performed in yagnaspirit (selfless welfare of others). In short, the Indian philosophy on business managementis to inculcate corporate social responsibilities.
    • 416 B. Muniapan and M. Dass7 Indian CSR modelThen, what are the expected characteristics of business excellence from the ancientIndian perspective? Is there a specific Indian CSR model? In accordance with the Indian philosophy, the characteristics of business excellenceare intricately weaved around spiritual threads of Vedic and Bhagavad-Gita teachings.First, business excellence must be dedicated to spiritualism (of work). All other matterthen falls into order. The business management corresponds to a cosmic order that isgrounded with concepts of self-determination and self-realisation. Secondly, businessexcellence should evolve around right actions and right measures. Self-realisation thatimmoral business strategies (example those related to poor quality products sold atexcessive profit margins) and unethical business tactics (example undercutting andshort-term profit taking) only results in business losses. Thirdly, business wealth should be accumulated by applying the right actions thatshould be shared equitably with all stakeholders. Selfless sharing of profits bringslong-term gains. Employees would be highly motivated, loyal and hugely committed tothe organisation. Finally, business excellence would be achieved if the business practicesare ethical and social responsible to the society. This will result in long-termsustainability of the business. The business excellence in accordance to the Indian philosophy is more than just abusiness objective. Being spiritual in structure, it attempts to achieve perfection(or moksha). It is the highest order systematically framed by the Vedic order system.Hence, disorder in business practices is expected to follow the law of karma (action andantecedent result). Business excellence in the context of the Indian philosophy is anexpression of virtue or dharma. An Indian CSR model can be possibly constructed upon the Vedic principles of virtueas key planks in modern business models. Key planks that should dominate the businessmodels follow the spiritualism context of self-realisation, the laws of karma, rightmeasures and finally, the scientific approach of order. Sri Krishna in the Bhagavad-Gitastates that ‘I am that action in all things that is unopposed to values’. Successful Indiancompanies can attest to this CSR model, namely, TATA group, Infosys, Wipro, Bajaj,Sriram Investments, BHEL, Bharat Heavy Industries, Asian Paints, Brook Bond, andLarsen and Toubro to name a few.8 Kautilya’s Arthashastra and CSRKautilya’s Arthashatra is one of the ancient Indian literatures which had provided someinsights to CSR, although the context was written for his King (Chandragupta Maurya) togovern the state. The roots of the Arthashatra can be traced from the Rig Veda. TheArthashastra deals primarily with economics and politics. In chapter 59 of Santiparva, ofthe Mahabharata, the details of state administration in an organised society are provided.It is called Niti Sastra, which was composed by Brahmadeva and summarised bySukracarya. Other sages such as Bharadvaja, Gaurisira, Yajnavalkya and Manu alsostated this science. In Santiparva, the subjects of Rajadharma, mentioning the duties ofthe kings are elaborated (Kodandaramayya, 2004 cited in Muniapan and Shaikh, 2007).R. Shamashastry was the librarian of Oriental Library in Mysore found a copy of theSanskrit text of the Arthashatra in a palm-leaf book, edited, and brought out an English
    • Corporate Social Responsibility: a philosophical approach 417version in 1909, it created waves in the western world. It was discovered thatthe Arthashatra written hundreds of years earlier provides a complete manual for runningthe state efficiently in all the branches, legislature, executive and judiciary. It alsoincludes all aspects of state administration such as establishing a governing hierarchy,selecting people, levying taxes, to laying down laws, to decide punishments for breakingthe law, etc. (Muniapan and Shaikh, 2007). In his Arthashatra, Kautilya maintained that a king (leader or CEO in the context oforganisation) should have no self-interest, happiness and joy for himself, his satisfactionlies in the welfare (happiness) of his people, i.e. he has to submerge his personality intothe larger personality of his people. This is based on the cultural ethos of self-abnegation.Kautilya states in the happiness of his subject lies the happiness of the king; and in theirwelfare lies his welfare. He shall not consider as good only that which pleases him buttreat as beneficial to him, whatever pleases his subjects. Bahujana sukhaya bahujanahitayacha – the welfare of the many and the happiness of the many. In fact, this conceptof the happiness of the many need integrated into the area of corporate management asthe basic principle. This ancient wisdom is also reflected in other languages. Twothousand years ago, Thiruvalluvar in Tamil Nadu wrote the Thirukkural and just likeKautilya’s Arthashastra, he also dealt with the characteristics of a well-runadministration or socially responsible organisations. For instance, when talking about theresponsibility of a king (leader), Thiruvalluvar says: Murai saithu kapatrum mannavanmakkalkku iraiyentru vaikkapadum (the king who administers justice and protects hispeople will be considered of divine quality; Vittal, 2004). Thiruvalluvar also says:Irai kakkum vayyakam ellam avanai murai kakkum muttacheyin (the king protects theworld and if he acts according to justice or dharma, then justice itself will protect him). Ifa person rules according to dharma, that dharma itself will protect him (dharmo rakshatirakshitaha). In the Indian context, this example can be seen in Ramayana, whenSri Rama (king) had to make the painful decision to banish Sita (queen) from Ayodhya.Sri Rama as an ideal king had to uphold the honour of his dynasty. He needed to setexamples for all generation to follow. Although Sri Rama’s decision to banish Sita mayseem to be harsh, the king sometimes needs to be harsh, as the first duty of the king is torule his people while other considerations are secondary, even if they affect personalhappiness (Muniapan, 2005b; Muniapan and Shaikh, 2007). There are also similar advices in Shantiparva of the Mahabharata, wherein the publicinterest (welfare) is to be accorded precedence over his (leader’s) interest. A leader (king)should, without doubt, look upon the subjects as his children. In determining theirdisputes, however, he should not show compassion. In performance of his duties, he isenjoined to be impartial. In the ancient India, the leader (king) is often compared to therain clouds, which bestow benefit, through rain (actions), to all and sundry, equally. Inthe context of corporate management, the organisation (state) leader is a catalytic changeagent. The Arthashastra views are wider and more comprehensive in this regard. Theleader (king) is the maker of his time. The important qualities and duties of the king areobtaining what has yet to be obtained, protecting what has been obtained, and increasingand properly using what has been obtained. Kautilya laid down three mainresponsibilities of a leader (king), they are raksha, which means security, palan, whichmeans growth and yogakshma, which means welfare. The meanings and the context ofthe three responsibilities differ in depending upon the environmental context.
    • 418 B. Muniapan and M. Dass9 CSR: happiness to all stakeholdersKautilya stressed the importance of happiness to all stakeholders of an organisation.He stated that happiness is obtained not only by wealth and profit, but also by doingthings rightly and doing right things (sukhasya moolam dharma). Dharma without wealthaccording to Kautilya is toothless (dharmasya moolam artha), and wealth withoutdharma is useless because a poor person cannot support the entire society. Indian culturehas always emphasised that sukhasya moolam dharma and dharmasya moolam arthataken together – namely, wealth does not lead to directly happiness. Happiness for selfand others results through ethical behaviour: wealth or resources make ethical behaviourpossible. This also means that one must strive to generate wealth – resources and money– share it equitably to create happiness for oneself and others. Such generation of wealthmust also be through ethical means, which alone would lead to overall happiness(Garde, 2003). Kautilya further stated to generate wealth you require an enterprise or anorganisation or an asset (arthasya moolam rajyam). He then stated the support fororganisation is the organs (rajyasya moolam indriyajayah), the functions, processes,activities, etc. The victory over organs of the body, which is the literal meaning of theword indiyajayah, is a well-known concept in the Indian culture and this refers to thecontrol over the five organ of sense (eyes, ears, tongue, nose and skin), an on five organsof action (hands, feet, mouth, genitals and anus). Conquering the body organs aremanifested through control over the six enemies of the mind – desires (kama), anger(krodha), greed (lobha), arrogance (mada), infatuation (moha) and envy (matsara).Only the governor or CEO who has conquered the organs of his body would be able toput the goals of the organisation first, especially when in conflict with self-interest(Muniapan and Shaikh, 2007).10 ConclusionsIn this paper, we have explored the philosophy of CSR from an ancient Indianperspective with reference to Kautilya’s Arthashastra (4th century BC). Although theinsights of CSR provided in this paper are limited to Indian context, some of these ideasof CSR can also be applied universally. Besides CSR, there are many managementconcepts from the ancient Indian literatures like the Kautilya’s Arthashastra, which arestill applicable in today’s corporate management. A deeper study of the book will openmany new areas of management concepts, which is yet to be known and practiced in themodern management. Besides, CSR Kautilya’s Arthashastra have dealt with many othertopics related to politics, economics, sociology, ethics, etc. We hope this paper willprovide a significant contribution to the literature on CSR from philosophicalperspectives. It is our hope to see more studies in other areas of corporate managementsuch as strategic management, financial management and human resource managementfrom Kautilya’s Arthashastra can be undertaken for future research.
    • Corporate Social Responsibility: a philosophical approach 419ReferencesAgle, B. and van Buren, H. (1999) ‘God and mammon: the modern relationship’, Business Ethics Quarterly, Vol. 9, pp.563–582.Bowen, T.J. (1953) Social Responsibilities of the Businessman. London, UK: Harper and Row.Calkins, M. (2000) ‘Recovering religion’s prophetic voice in business ethics’, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 23, pp.339–352.Carroll, A.B. (1979) ‘A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance’, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 4, pp.495–505.Chakraborty, D. (2006) ‘Is an Indian ethics of virtue possible?’, Journal of Human Values, Vol. 12. Delhi, India: Sage Publications.Chaudhuri, A. (2003) Theory “I” Management Leadership Success Multiplier Model. Available at: http://www.arindamchaudhuri.com/theory.htm.Chinmayananda, S. (1992) Commentary on Bhagavad-Gita. Mumbai, India: Sai Enterprises.Dawkins, J. (2004) ‘The public’s view of corporate responsibility 2003’, White Paper Series, MORI. Available at http://www.mori.comDonaldson, T. and Preston, L.E. (1995) ‘The stakeholder theory of the corporation; concepts, evidence, and implications’, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 20, pp.65–91.Eberstadt, N.N. (1977) ‘What history tells us about corporate responsibilities’, in A.B. Carroll (Ed.), Business and Society Review (Autumn) in Managing Corporate Social Responsibilities. Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Company.Epstein, E.M. (2002) ‘Religion and business – the critical role of religious traditions in management education’, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 38, pp.91–96.Evan, W.M. and Freeman, R.E. (1998) ‘A stakeholder theory of the modern corporation: Kantian capitalism’, in T. Beauchamp and N. Bowie (Eds), Ethical Theory and Business. Englewood Cliffs, NJ.Garde, A.R. (2003) Canakya’s Aphorisms on Management, Ahmedabad Management Association, Ahmedabad.Hermeneutics, Available at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermeneutics.Kodandaramayya, J.P. (2004) The Message of Mahabharata: The Nation’s Magnum Opus. Mumbai, India: Bharatiya Vidya Bhuvan.Longnecker, J.G., McKinney, J.A. and Moore, C.W. (2004) ‘Religious intensity, evangelical christianity, and business ethics: an empirical study’, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 55, pp.373–386.Mahavir (2001) Vedic Artha Vyavastha, Samanantar Prakashan, New Delhi, pp.41–63.Mukhopadhy, G. (1960) Studies in the Upanisads. Calcutta. Kolkata, India: Oriental Press.Muniapan, B. (2005a) ‘The Philosophy of Bhagavad Gita and its Relevance to Human Resource Development in the 21st Century’, Paper presented in the Proceedings of the SSEASR Conference held on 27–30 January in New Delhi, India.Muniapan, B. (2005b) Valmiki Ramayana and Leadership: Exploring and Explaining the Transformational Leadership Style of Sri Rama, the Son of King Dasaratha, International Conference on Sanskrit: Sanskrit in Asia, Unity in Diversity organized by Sanskrit Studies Centre, Silpakorn University, 23–26 June, Bangkok, Thailand.Muniapan, B. and Shaikh, J. (2007) Lessons in Corporate Governance from Kautilya’s Arthashastra in Ancient India, World Review of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable Development (WREMSD). Special Issue on: “Accounting Standards Convergence, Corporate Governance and Sustainability Practices in East Asia”, Vol. 3, pp.50–51.Niskala, M. and Tarna, K. (2003) Social Responsibility Reporting, KHT Media, Gummerus Oy, Helsinki, p.244.
    • 420 B. Muniapan and M. DassPandey, R.K. and Tripathi, P.S. (2002) ‘Vedic values and corporate excellence’, in S.C. Dhamija and V.K. Singh (Eds), Vedic Values and Corporate Excellence (pp.168–171). Uttaranchal, India: Gurukul Kaugri University.Radhakrishnan, S. (1929) Indian Philosophy: Volume 1 (2nd ed.). London, UK: George Allen and Unwin.Radhakrishnan, P. (2005) Kautilya Arthshastra, Available at: http://www.chinfo.org/%5C downloads%5CScholars%5CEssay1.pdf.The Rig Veda, translated by Griffith, R. (1896) available at http://www.sacredtexts.com/hin/ rigveda/Sharma, G.D. (2001) Management and the Indian Ethos. New Delhi, India: Rupa and Company.Vittal, N. (2004) Ethics in Public Administration: Classical Insights and Current Practices, Available at: http://www.boloji.com/opinion/0124.htm.Vivekananda, S. (2000) The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda. Calcutta, India: Advaita Ashrama.Weaver, G.R. and Agle, B.R. (2002) ‘Religiosity and ethical behaviour in organisations: a symbolic interactionist perspective’, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 27, pp.77–97.World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) (2000) Corporate Social Responsibility: Making Good Business Sense, Geneva, p.33.BibliographyCSR: Meeting Expectations (1999) World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD), Available at: http://www.wbcsd.org/DocRoot/RGk80O49q8ErwmWXIwtF/ CSRmeeting.pdf.Dawkins, J. (1979) ‘Corporate responsibility: the communication challenge’, Journal of Communication Management, Vol. 9, pp.108–119.Gambhirananda, S. (trans.) (1966) Taittiriya Upanisads, I, 6–10, in Eight Upanisads, Advaita Asrama, Kolkata.Prabhupada, S. (2003) Bhagavad-Gita As It Is (2nd ed.). London, UK: The Bhaktivedanta Book Trust.Radhakrishnan, S. (1926) Hindu View of Life. London, UK: Allen and Unwin.Sharma, A.K. and Talwar, B. (2005) ‘Insights from practice, corporate social responsibility: modern vis-à-vis Vedic approach’, Measuring Business Excellence, Vol. 9, pp.35–45, (Bradford, UK: Emerald Group Publishing).Stackhouse, M.L., McCann, D.P. and Finke, R. (1995) On Moral Business. Grand Rapids, MI, Eerdmans.